TagPCHB(607)

Meeting notes from 2-26-01 discuss a new CFM proposal for Walker that may significantly increase storage requirements and affect SMP design feasibility, potentially impacting NRMP. Key concerns include the need to understand design feasibility and impacts, with discussion of resizing UDP to allow CFM regulations and hydrological monitoring. Participants noted too much time was being spent on modeling rather than addressing core design and impact questions.

Email chain (AR018498–AR018499) dated July 19, 2001, from Erik Stockdale (likely Washington State Department of Ecology) to Joan Marchioro (ATG) and Andy McMillan, forwarding a message from Jim Kelley of Parametrix, Inc. The judge ruled in favor of Port Of Seattle in the Parcel 92 condemnation case, finding that prior converted croplands were wetlands under

In a July 13, 2001 email, Ann Kenny of Washington State Department of Ecology urged the Port of Seattle to continue researching the water quantities contributed to base stream flows by septic tank systems slated for removal in the airport acquisition area. She noted that while eliminating septic tanks helps reduce fecal coliform contamination, it also removes water that recharges base flows — a water quality concern regulated under RCW 90.48. Kenny suggested the Port work to verify the accuracy of a 66,000-gallons-per-day estimate from its December 2000 Low Stream Flow Analysis by cross-referencing sewer authority and water supplier records.

This document is an email chain from June-July 2001 between Washington State Department of Ecology staff discussing acceptable fill material criteria for the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Third Runway project. Officials debated whether to restrict fill to naturally occurring uncontaminated soils or to allow other materials subject to contamination testing standards, with recommendations including requiring the top six feet of fill to be clean natural soil and using Table 749-3 screening values to protect plants and animals. The discussion also addressed whether the state's Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) standards should apply, including requirements for contaminant testing, groundwater monitoring, and terrestrial ecological evaluation.

These draft meeting notes from July 9, 2001 document a technical working session between the Port of Seattle, Washington Department of Ecology, and King County regarding low stream flow analysis for the Sea-Tac International Airport Third Runway project. The group discussed methods for determining low flow impacts on fish habitat, reviewed a mitigation proposal for the Des Moines Watershed involving a 0.1 cfs compensatory flow release from July 24 through October 24, and received a status briefing on the Miller and Walker watershed analyses. Key topics included the use of 2-year 7-day low flow rates to calculate mitigation requirements, reserve vault sizing, and how to handle non-hydrologic effects such as water rights removal and septic system impacts in the property acquisition area.

Final meeting notes prepared by Kate Snider of Floyd & Snider Inc. for the 401 Permit Decision-Making process for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Third Runway, covering a Low Flow Analysis meeting held July 9, 2001. Attendees included representatives from Washington Department of Ecology (Ann Kenny, John Drabeck), King County (Kelly Whiting), Port Of Seattle (Keith Smith),

In a July 6, 2001 internal email, Ann Kenny outlines the technical information that the Washington State Department of Ecology required before approving any mitigation approach for low-flow water impacts related to a Port project. The requested materials included hydrological modeling files, 7-day low-flow analysis data comparing pre- and post-project conditions, a formal mitigation volume proposal, and documentation on the feasibility of vault filling as a mitigation method. Ecology also indicated that written documentation of outcomes would be required following a scheduled July 9 meeting with the Port.

Notes from a July 6, 2001 telephone conference involving Kate Snider, Keith Smith, and others discuss coordination with the Department of Energy (DOE) and review of Des Moines-related graphics and vault feasibility information. Topics include biologist availability, the biological defensibility of using 2-year and 7-day low flow data, and the status of Walker Creek non-contiguous areas. Ann reminds participants that Ecology is seeking all backup information in the format agreed upon at the June 25th meeting.

In a July 2, 2001 email chain, Kelly Whiting of Metro King County raises concerns about the analysis of 'non-hydrologic' effects related to water rights relinquishments and their impact on summer low flows in a Sammamish River watershed study. Whiting questions the assumptions made about non-respondents to a water withdrawal survey, arguing that the rates assigned to them appear disproportionately high compared to trends shown by actual survey respondents. The email requests a walkthrough during an upcoming Thursday meeting to clarify how these figures would be incorporated into a low-flow mitigation plan.

A July 2001 email from King County engineer Kelly Whiting summarizes ecological recommendations regarding proposed stream flow mitigation measures. A lead stream ecologist advised that mitigation plans be compared against existing stream hydrology to avoid abrupt changes that could disrupt biological processes, such as sudden summer flow increases confusing fish behavior. The ecologist also emphasized that water quality factors like temperature and dissolved oxygen are as important as flow rates, and suggested introducing reserved water gradually through ponds or wetlands rather than directly into streams.